|From:||John W. Eaton|
|Subject:||bug tracker categories: compatibility vs. feature request|
|Date:||Wed, 15 Aug 2018 10:10:46 -0400|
|User-agent:||Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.9.1|
Many bug reports now have the item group set to "Matlab Compatibility" even if the feature is new in Matlab or not yet present in Octave. It is true that such additions would make Octave more compatible with Matlab, but these are also new features, so I would like to tag them as feature requests.
The "Matlab Compatibility" item group should be reserved for features or functions that already exist in Octave but that behave differently from Matlab.
Additionally, we should always set the priority and severity for feature requests to be lower than for other bugs.
The guidelines would be:* Features present in Matlab but not in Octave: Set the item group to "Feature Request", the priority to "Low", and the severity to "Wish".
* Features present in both Matlab and Octave: If the behavior is clearly wrong, then categorize by type of failure, not as a compatibility issue. For example, it is better to categorize an incorrect numerical result or segfault as such rather than as a compatibility issue. Otherwise, if the behavior is different but not necessarily wrong, categorize as a compatibility issue.
|[Prev in Thread]||Current Thread||[Next in Thread]|